Presidentism of the Day

posted at 8:05 am on January 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Yes, I know I usually start weekdays with an amateurish stumble du jour from our nation’s Chief Executive, but in light of his speech last night, President Barack Obama deserves credit for not just avoiding the train wreck over the last few days in partisan sniping, but addressing it head on at the memorial service for the murdered in Tucson. Instead, Obama gave a moving speech that transcended (and quelled) the strange pep-rally vibe that had permeated the event prior to his taking the stage, one that genuinely connected us to each of the lives snuffed out by a senseless murder spree, especially perhaps Christina Green, the youngest of the dead at age 9. And in his own way, with a three-word ad-lib, Obama rebuked the nonsensical blamethrowing that had begun within minutes of the tragedy.

Allahpundit quoted the key part of the speech last night, but I’ll do it again here:

You see, when a tragedy like this strikes, it is part of our nature to demand explanations – to try to impose some order on the chaos, and make sense out of that which seems senseless. Already we’ve seen a national conversation commence, not only about the motivations behind these killings, but about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental health systems. Much of this process, of debating what might be done to prevent such tragedies in the future, is an essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.

Scripture tells us that there is evil in the world, and that terrible things happen for reasons that defy human understanding. In the words of Job, “when I looked for light, then came darkness.” Bad things happen, and we must guard against simple explanations in the aftermath.

For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind.

So yes, we must examine all the facts behind this tragedy. We cannot and will not be passive in the face of such violence. We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.

But what we can’t do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another. As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.

After all, that’s what most of us do when we lose someone in our family – especially if the loss is unexpected. We’re shaken from our routines, and forced to look inward. We reflect on the past. Did we spend enough time with an aging parent, we wonder. Did we express our gratitude for all the sacrifices they made for us? Did we tell a spouse just how desperately we loved them, not just once in awhile but every single day?

So sudden loss causes us to look backward – but it also forces us to look forward, to reflect on the present and the future, on the manner in which we live our lives and nurture our relationships with those who are still with us. We may ask ourselves if we’ve shown enough kindness and generosity and compassion to the people in our lives. Perhaps we question whether we are doing right by our children, or our community, and whether our priorities are in order. We recognize our own mortality, and are reminded that in the fleeting time we have on this earth, what matters is not wealth, or status, or power, or fame – but rather, how well we have loved, and what small part we have played in bettering the lives of others.

That process of reflection, of making sure we align our values with our actions – that, I believe, is what a tragedy like this requires. For those who were harmed, those who were killed – they are part of our family, an American family 300 million strong. We may not have known them personally, but we surely see ourselves in them. In George and Dot, in Dorwan and Mavy, we sense the abiding love we have for our own husbands, our own wives, our own life partners. Phyllis – she’s our mom or grandma; Gabe our brother or son. In Judge Roll, we recognize not only a man who prized his family and doing his job well, but also a man who embodied America’s fidelity to the law. In Gabby, we see a reflection of our public spiritedness, that desire to participate in that sometimes frustrating, sometimes contentious, but always necessary and never-ending process to form a more perfect union.

And in Christina…in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic and full of magic.

So deserving of our love.

And so deserving of our good example. If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.

But it was the next section that delivered the message, with an ad-lib I’ll note in bold:

The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better in our private lives – to be better friends and neighbors, co-workers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let’s remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy – it did not – but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud. It should be because we want to live up to the example of public servants like John Roll and Gabby Giffords, who knew first and foremost that we are all Americans, and that we can question each other’s ideas without questioning each other’s love of country, and that our task, working together, is to constantly widen the circle of our concern so that we bequeath the American dream to future generations.

Frankly, the tenor of politics since Saturday hit such an irrational pitch that I wondered whether Obama would be able to make this point at all. Clearly, Obama took this moment seriously enough to lead rather than to pursue partisan cheap shots, using the dishonest “some have said” device to which the media has clung over the last couple of days after the evidence became overwhelming that the murderer was a psychopath of no particular rational ideology. He told the nation in no unclear terms that the argument that a lack of civility led to these deaths is simply flat-out wrong.

Some of my friends may criticize Obama for not defending Palin specifically, or for waiting until the memorial to have rebuked those attempting to exploit the deaths for political gain. On the first point, though, this was a memorial service and it wouldn’t have been appropriate to name other names than the dead, the wounded, and the heros who helped save lives. The second point may be germane criticism of the previous couple of days, but even if it came late, Obama stepped up and led last night.

So kudos to President Obama for what may be the finest moment of his presidency. I disagree with his policies and many of his tactics, and I will have no problem getting back to work in opposing them after this post publishes. But he deserves credit and gratitude for his leadership at a point in time where the nation needed it, and I’m happy to give him both.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

I’ve read through a lot of the comments by those who have made it very clear they are offended by Ed’s kudos to President Obama for a job well done last night.

I understand the anger and resentment so many people feel for Obama. The way he has treated his political opponents in Congress and all over the country was disgraceful and juvenile. “I won.” “The election is over, John.” “I’m the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks.” “Bitter clingers.” His constant need to place the blame for his failed policies on former President Bush is especially insulting and unpresidential. I understand why some people simply can’t bring themselves to say something nice about Obama when he just now comes to the conclusion that people should use words that heal, not wound.

However, this outrage that some are experiencing seems to have become so intense that it has infected what good will and friendship they have built with Ed and other like minded conservatives. When commenters would rather turn on and then insult Ed – and other commenters – for simply complementing Obama for his speech than to respectfully disagree with them or not say anything at all, that could be an indication their outrage is in control of their emotions.

It is not good for anyone when one’s anger for Obama becomes so intense and encompassing that it seeps into and undermines the good things in one’s life, like the camaraderie with fellow conservatives.

…above all the rabid cheering, which Obama did not lift a finger to quell though he could have done so at any time.

Missy on January 13, 2011 at 12:38 PM

Honestly, don’t be surprised when it comes out the University president and Obama’s people coordinated with the cheering contingent to create a palpable illusion of the commander-in-chief’s ever-strong popularity. It seems like the noise was encouraged, orchestrated for primetime.

Yup, I’m guessing Øbama revised his speech, almost at the last minute, when he saw the poll results. But neglected to direct the organizers of the even to switch formats from a campaign rally to a memorial service.

Sorry Ed, but not seeing this as anything more than Presidential. The fact that folks like you are gushing over it tells me you really haven’t been paying attention.

This was nothing extraordinary, this was just Presidential. His first actual Presidential act in two years of opportunities. Either Bush or Clinton could have pulled this off in their sleep at the level he achieved.

It was a campaign stop at a college campus. Made to order.
Anyone who thinks the WH didn’t have control of the t-shirts, We Can Thrive slogan, and the whole agenda is pretty naive. This thing was a political event.

Ed, I think you are right on this. I do know one thing — it’s a great tool with which to batter the Palin bashers over at the LA Times. We get to use Alinsky Rule #4 over and over as we remain, by the President’s own stated measure, reasonable. So far, it’s not working for the more rabid guys, but that’s all to the better — they aren’t the audience for the responses being put up by us conservatives, and the difference is obvious.

Future politicos, please heed this advice. Never hold a memorial service in a university arena, and never give out T-shirts prior to the event. Those two choices set the tone for this entire spectacle. Some will excuse the bizarre atmosphere or blame it entirely on those in the audience to deflect attention from the president. But the president’s team had the final call on everything. They could have demanded a more suitable setting, and set a more appropriate tone. They didn’t. This gauche spectacle is the Obama administration’s fault. The tone of the event overshadowed whatever good words of comfort and honor were in his lengthy speech.

Kim, blogs are opinion pieces that also provide information. By disagreeing with Ed, people are expressing their opinion on his stance on the political rally, err, I mean memorial service, held last night. They are entitled to their opinion as well. A lot of people come to this blog daily to read what he and AP have written. I do not think that Ed expects us to agree with him 100 % of the time. The Boss Emeritus, Michelle Malkin, has written an excellent piece about last night, that you might want to check out, as well.

Anyone who thinks the WH didn’t have control of the t-shirts, We Can Thrive slogan, and the whole agenda is pretty naive. This thing was a political event.

a capella on January 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

a capella, allow me to introduce you to this guy!

The University of AZ organized the event and invited Obama. I don’t think he or his administration had much, if any, input into the logistics of staging the event — including the t-shirts that were passed out.

Obama delivered one tonight, but failed at the other over the past three days as Pima County Sheriff Dupnik, Democrat Party leaders, and media abettors poisoned the public square with the very vitriol the president now condemns.

Good points made. I didn’t watch the pep rally last night, I just couldn’t. But I’ll accept Ed’s conclusions because I know he’s more objective than I am. I admit that. For me, a speech is either Reaganesque or it is not. And my co-worker this morning, who is a fellow tea party member, also admitted that she thought it was a decent speech. (I was of course aghast that she had gone over to the dark side – but she assured me she hadn’t).

So, I heard there was a lot of blue and white at the campaign rally, but was there much red, which is also a University of Arizona and Republican color? I’ve seen a photo of a lot of blue chairs and blue t-shirts.

I heard it on the radio so I didn’t get to see the atmosphere. I agreed with the message, but I kept thinking that I didn’t want to believe him. I would expect more of what he said from my priest than my president. Still, the message, if truly meant by him, was good so I’ll give him a pass for this speech.

It is not good for anyone when one’s anger for Obama becomes so intense and encompassing that it seeps into and undermines the good things in one’s life, like the camaraderie with fellow conservatives.

Ok. My sermon is done.

Kim Priestap on January 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

It wasnt’ all that long ago that the greatest speech reader, evah, encouraged Americans, of a specific race, to punish their enemies.

If you consider yourself a conservative, you were the target of the statement. Still have the “He’s being Presidential” feeling?

Sorry. Words mean something. I’ve heard that somewhere. Every word spoken is just as meaningful as any other word. There are 3 options to choose from:

1. Obama is a consumate liar and will say anything to hear the approval of the crowd.

2. He doesn’t understand or comprehend a word he reads, allowing him to say wildly opposite things as if both were deeply held beliefs.

3. His intellect far exceeds our capability to comprehend it.

For me, its a tie between 1 and 2.

Ed and AP’s opinion of this does not change my opinion of them, which is high.

When commenters would rather turn on and then insult Ed – and other commenters – for simply complementing Obama for his speech than to respectfully disagree with them or not say anything at all, that could be an indication their outrage is in control of their emotions.

That sounds dangerously close to the MSM’s Preferred Narrative of the last several days.

Anyone who thinks the WH didn’t have control of the t-shirts, We Can Thrive slogan, and the whole agenda is pretty naive. This thing was a political event.

a capella

Oh, you betcha. On a MUCH teenier scale ~ I ran the Escambia Rubio volunteers, and if Marco was due in and the Miami advance guys showed up, even an hour beforehand, and saw something that didn’t cut the mustard? OUT IT WENT and that was that.

And, if the events of last night are a guage, our President hasn’t the ability nor desire to actually establish decorum and tone despite his followers telling us otherwise.

He could have established that last weekend…easily.

If Obama cannot step up to a microphone and politely ask the crowd to tone it down and tone it down now…as this was supposed to be a memorial service…then how can one reasonably expect this same president to stand up to anyone, foreign leader or potentate, and not be cowed?

Obversely if this was a to be a political rally all along…after all, Herman Cain just figuratively threw his hat into the ring just yesterday…why cannot the White House own up to it? No big deal, really. We all know Obama is going to seek re-election and it is never too soon to start that campaign.

So which is it?

Ineptness on the part of the White House Team and the Secret Service detail? Or a planned political rally? or an out of control crowd in a confined space with the President of the United States being held captive lest he upset the audience?

In any event, not all that “presidential” when you look at it….honestly.

By disagreeing with Ed, people are expressing their opinion on his stance on the political rally, err, I mean memorial service, held last night. They are entitled to their opinion as well.

I’m not talking about those who disagree with Ed. That’s fully expected. I’m talking about the commenters who are implying that Ed, after years of posts that intelligently and thoughtfully skewered Obama, is suddenly stupid and gullible because he complemented Obama’s speech.

And the worst of all of them was the guy who quoted Ed’s last paragraph and then offered two words of editorial: “slurping noise.”

Seriously?

So, all those thousands of posts in which Ed sliced and diced the president’s awful policies, the countless Obamateurisms in which he exposed Obama’s amateurishness mean nothing and he’s deserving of insults like these?

Yes, I’d say the outrage they feel for Obama is getting a bit out of hand.

Still, the message, if truly meant by him, was good so I’ll give him a pass for this speech.

ConDem on January 13, 2011 at 1:02 PM

It wasn’t truly meant by him. Of course, I can understand that you truly want it to be truly meant by him, so you ignore the many instances he himself has relished using vicious rhetoric. Don’t give yourself a pass on this one, unless you truly believe the leopard has changed his spots.

If Obama cannot step up to a microphone and politely ask the crowd to tone it down and tone it down now…as this was supposed to be a memorial service…then how can one reasonably expect this same president to stand up to anyone, foreign leader or potentate, and not be cowed?

That sounds dangerously close to the MSM’s Preferred Narrative of the last several days.

Missy on January 13, 2011 at 1:04 PM

No, I’m concerned some are turning on fellow conservatives because they can’t let go of their feelings for Obama. Besides, I don’t know how anyone can maintain an intense outrage about anything. It’s too emotionally exhausting for me. I have to take breaks because I’m afraid I’ll burn out and then won’t care about what Obama does to our country at all anymore.

If the coach from the local high school is forbidden from making a simple personal invocation prior to a football or basketball game…how can the Attorney General of the United States be permitted to read from a King James version of the Bible at a official federal political event…or any other Cabinet member…the DHS Secretary, for example?

Whatever happened to that separation of church and state thing all of a sudden?

The speech was the acceptable pablum from a guy who is Spockish. He does have children so it may have a little more impact on him that a young girl was murdered.
What is hard to fathom is why he did not remind the crowd that solemnity would be correct.The text reads well enough but the venue destroyed much of the value of the words. The WH needs to get a protocol chief in place for all his events,the silent moment at the WH was a good photo op. It seems again that the amateurs still run loose in the WH and do stuff halfassed.
Text gets a B,must be a new writer on hand,performance/delivery was not his usual pace,again suspect new writer.The crowd TACKY, clueless, stacked deck not good for his campaign spots soon to be seen on TV.At times it looked as if bomma might have been POed at the crowd, the noise,just maybe he sensed it was a big OffDah

Rush: We were lectured on civility, but he said incivility had no role in contributing to the shootings. So why the lecture on civility in the first place?
petefrt on January 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Reminds me of this: “I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest.” – Winston Churchill

Replace Russia/Russian with Obama/Democrat Party

Kim Priestap on January 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Well-said. Those who say, but, but, but we can disagree with Ed and Allah miss the point. Of course we can, and often do. It’s how these disagreements are expressed that separate the wheat from the chaff.

If Obama cannot step up to a microphone and politely ask the crowd to tone it down and tone it down now…as this was supposed to be a memorial service…then how can one reasonably expect this same president to stand up to anyone, foreign leader or potentate, and not be cowed?

coldwarrior on January 13, 2011 at 1:12 PM

Last night’s rally was NOT the somber Memorial Service he thought he knew.

The University of AZ organized the event and invited Obama. I don’t think he or his administration had much, if any, input into the logistics of staging the event — including the t-shirts that were passed out.

Tom_Shipley on January 13, 2011 at 9:28 AM
Del Dolemonte on January 13, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Giving Ed and AP the benefit of the doubt, in their haste to post timely responses to Obama’s speech they failed to see the progressive doublespeak in it. If that isn’t the case, Ed and AP are RINOs. Real conservatives would have had red flags popping up before the first five minutes of the speech were over.

If one calls oneself a conservative, on should read up on the subject to be sure the term is being used correctly. The desire to keep one’s own money isn’t a complete definition. It’s just a start.

Shirts sit on the back of chairs before a memorial service for the victims of Saturday’s shootings at McKale Memorial Center on the University of Arizona campus Wednesday, Jan. 12, 2011, in Tucson, Ariz.… Read more »
(AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

Kim, blogs are opinion pieces that also provide information. By disagreeing with Ed, people are expressing their opinion on his stance on the political rally, err, I mean memorial service, held last night. They are entitled to their opinion as well. A lot of people come to this blog daily to read what he and AP have written. I do not think that Ed expects us to agree with him 100 % of the time.

kingsjester on January 13, 2011 at 12:56 PM

I complete agree. But I’m not talking about those who disagree. I’m talking about the commenters who reacted with disdain, as if Ed’s thousands of posts in which he masterfully skewered Obama’s awful policies and his countless Obamateurisms mean nothing. One guy implied Ed’d post was akin to a political surrender. Another suddenly thinks Ed is stupid and gullible. A third insulted Ed’s manhood. And the worst one of all quoted part of Ed’s last paragraph and then offered two words of his own: “Slurping noise.”

And as an aside just in case some are thinking this: I didn’t write my original comment for Ed’s benefit. I wrote it for the benefit of my fellow conservatives. Conservatives think. Liberals feel.

If the coach from the local high school is forbidden from making a simple personal invocation prior to a football or basketball game…how can the Attorney General of the United States be permitted to read from a King James version of the Bible at a official federal political event…or any other Cabinet member…the DHS Secretary, for example?

Whatever happened to that separation of church and state thing all of a sudden?coldwarrior on January 13, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Maybe the Native American invocation neutralized it. Multiculturalism and all that. Just sayin’…

Ed and AP’s opinion of this does not change my opinion of them, which is high.

BobMbx on January 13, 2011 at 1:03 PM

I respect Ed’s understanding of the political landscape and generally of his warriness of liberal verbage versus intent. But I recognize that he is a deeply flawed human, like the rest of us, and when he’s wrong, he’s very, very wrong and he doesn’t get a pass because he is so often right. He doesn’t need us to massage his ego.

Any time a speaker, such as The Medicine Man last night, touts his membership in a PC identity group, you know you’re at a partisan event. And when the audience wildly applauds it, you know you’re outnumbered.

Yeah, Obama can sound all magnanimous after it’s determined that it can’t be pinned on Palin. Why didn’t he issue a statement to this effect right after the shooting and pre-empt his media attack dogs?

No, I’m concerned some are turning on fellow conservatives because they can’t let go of their feelings for Obama. Besides, I don’t know how anyone can maintain an intense outrage about anything. It’s too emotionally exhausting for me. I have to take breaks because I’m afraid I’ll burn out and then won’t care about what Obama does to our country at all anymore.

Kim Priestap on January 13, 2011 at 1:22 PM

I liked your sermon and I pretty much agree with what you’re saying here.

Last nights memorial service was a circus, tacky to the max from the t-shirts to the screaming and clapping. Not like any memorial service I’ve ever seen. Obama’s speech was too long, but he did get in a couple of good lines, but nothing memorable.

And there seems to be an elephant in the room that nobody is willing to state out loud, thus their displeasure with Ed and the “speech”…………

I’ve seen more good Conservatives thrown under the bus lately, that I find it troubling.

It was long winded, full of platitudes and over reached — it was more a campaign speech to set himself up as once again being the “above the fray” post-partisan president, not a real eulogy. To me it felt false, and the crowd’s WOOT-WOOTs was bizarre. If Obama can do the “Hey, settle down” when he gets too much applause at other venues, he absolutely SHOULD have settled the crowd down. He did not. His staff created a LOGO and printed out T-SHIRTS for cryin out loud! You don’t DO that at a memorial event. It was Obama at his best posturing, I suppose, he’s in his comfort zone when he gets to act the sensitive faux preacher guy from on high.

This isn’t a rational discussion between parties of differing but equally plausible viewpoints. The left engages in lies, intentional deception, and whatever else they feel is needed to command power. The acquiescence of heretofore respected pundits is embarrassing. I’m embarrassed for them.

Thanks. Didn’t mean to go on a long missive but it bothered me to see such comment drivel from conservatives. It was unnecessary and unseemly.

When conservatives issue insults to fellow conservatives with whom they disagree or to anyone with whom they disagree actually, it’s because they are being driven by their emotions instead of reason. That’s something you’d expect of a liberal, not a conservative.

I like coming to Hot Air because I know I will read comments by conservatives that are intelligent, cogent, and thoughtful. When commenters throw insults it’s because emotions are driving their thought process. They make themselves look small and petty. Of course, as a conservative, I believe in individual freedom and liberty, so if someone wants to do that on public blog for everyone to see, they have that right. It’s just that I hate seeing fellow conservatives reduce themselves in this way.

“We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.”

Exactly what “old assumptions” should be challenged and how in the world will that lessen prospects of violence in the future? Honestly, you start reading through the text of Obama’s speech asking rational questions and the whole thing disintegrates into pablum.

I complete agree. But I’m not talking about those who disagree. I’m talking about the commenters who reacted with disdain, as if Ed’s thousands of posts in which he masterfully skewered Obama’s awful policies and his countless Obamateurisms mean nothing. One guy implied Ed’d post was akin to a political surrender. Another suddenly thinks Ed is stupid and gullible. A third insulted Ed’s manhood. And the worst one of all quoted part of Ed’s last paragraph and then offered two words of his own: “Slurping noise.”

And as an aside just in case some are thinking this: I didn’t write my original comment for Ed’s benefit. I wrote it for the benefit of my fellow conservatives. Conservatives think. Liberals feel.

Kim Priestap on January 13, 2011 at 1:38 PM

A lot of people don’t seem to understand what is going on here. Ed and people who are thinking like Ed right now deserve every bit of crap flung their way right now.

Think about it. Hard. For the last five/six days the POTUS sat on his ass and watched his minions (love the word – thanks to the poster(s) who coined it) call the possible next POTUS a murderer and marginalize her along with doing the same to **YOU**. This was no accident. This was deliberate.

We have seen NO prominent GOP politician or talking head come to SP’s aid and/or **YOUR** aid. They all sat on their hands and let the “conservatives are killers” meme grow and flourish.

So now when Obama trots out the circus and has a pretty speech covered in fairy dust everyone ooooohs and aaaaahs over it.

No. Wrong. I actually read some idiot on twitter say “it was what the nation needed to hear”. No. The nation needs to hear the truth. The nation needed a president to come out on day two and say that what was happening was unacceptable. They needed a president who didn’t treat a dead child and five dead adults as campaign fodder. He could have been crapping out gold eggs to give to the poor and IT IS UNACCEPTABLE FIVE DAYS AFTER THE FACT.

The left is laughing right now. They were given FIVE WHOLE DAYS to call you murderers and try to pin this on SP and it worked. People like Ed and his ilk are saying pretty speech. That’s all it takes is pretty words? The only acceptable response is a big FU to Obama and the left. He is not a president nor is he presidential and no amount of flowery words will change that. He failed you by sitting idle for four days. You don’t matter. Do you think he would have sat idle for anyone BUT conservatives and/or SP?

It’s somewhat comforting to see the comments here and how a good portion of people aren’t buying it.

SHOUT OUT TO HAWKDRIVER: You may be right about the third party thing. The current “leadership” and group the GOP have right now are totally useless. Unless I missed it, not ONE came out in defense SP and to fight what was happening and hid under their collective beds. My apologies for suggesting that you wait and see. We see that they are cowards and let the “conservatives are killers” meme flourish. These are not leaders and are not worthy of your votes.

And for those that will say this is stooping to their level one question: Do you want to win or do you want to sit on the sidelines and watch THEM control the narrative?

“We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future.”

Exactly what “old assumptions” should be challenged and how in the world will that lessen prospects of violence in the future? Honestly, you start reading through the text of Obama’s speech asking rational questions and the whole thing disintegrates into pablum.

Obungler did his job. Period. The setting and the execution were crass and inappropriate and he did not exercise due diligence to keep to the high standards of a presidential appearance at a solemn memorial. C+

Ed and people who are thinking like Ed right now deserve every bit of crap flung their way right now.

They don’t need crap flung. They deserve a well reasoned rebuttal with specific examples for support. That will do much more good in changing their minds that flinging crap.

And your comments immediately following are spot on and should be read by every single member of the Republican caucus. They would not be in control of the House and a hair’s width away from controlling the Senate without Sarah Palin or the grass roots Tea Party movement. It’s a terrible betrayal.

Ed and people who are thinking like Ed right now deserve every bit of crap flung their way right now.

They don’t need crap flung. They deserve a well reasoned rebuttal with specific examples for support. That will do much more good in changing their minds that flinging crap.

And your comments immediately following are spot on and should be read by every single member of the Republican caucus. They would not be in control of the House and a hair’s width away from controlling the Senate without Sarah Palin or the grass roots Tea Party movement. It’s a terrible betrayal.

Kim Priestap on January 13, 2011 at 2:30 PM

We’ll have to agree to disagree on the crap flinging. ;)

I don’t see a need to be thoughtful and reasoned after being called a murderer (and a racist, but that’s a different day) and seeing someone who is supposed to be the leader of *everyone* essentially attempt to guarantee his next term. I’d prefer to win and if it means leaving people like Ed behind, then so be it.

I have no need to be “above the fray” as we have seen what the left’s ideology has done for the past 40 years. If people like Ed can be swayed by pretty words, then they will be swayed by my pretty words and then the next speaker of pretty words. Win ugly or lose pretty.

Totally agree with everything you say. One thing I mentioned last night after Bret Baier’s news was Krauthammer saying Palin was too late with her speech and she interjected herself back into the story. Did no one but me find that offensive? I will never listen to anything he has to say again, and then he says Obama was brilliant. RINO!

^ perhaps it was quelled after the 15th time the speech was interrupted by applause, hoots and cheers….or the 22nd time…or wait, maybe it was the 30th time. Did we even watch the same event last night?

But he deserves credit and gratitude for his leadership at a point in time where the nation needed it, and I’m happy to give him both.

Really? A leader would have told the crowd to shut up and be polite. What would a military leader have done? Asked the kids to be respectful!

me-thinks the Medicine man with his feather and red bandana cast a spell upon hundreds of conservative bloggers, i leave the Sour krauts, Frums, Nooners, Roves and Rollins out of this they were already skeered to death of palin and had to use this to marginalize her as the libs have.

Did no one but me find that offensive? I will never listen to anything he has to say again, and then he says Obama was brilliant. RINO!
silvernana on January 13, 2011 at 2:39 PM

I didn’t find it “offensive”. He was making a point about the political wisdom of what she did. Krauthammer made some good points. One can disagree without banishing the pundit to virtual Siberia. Personally, I liked what she wrote on Facebook and think she should have left it at that. Did not like the video presentation at all.

As for Krauthammer’s comments about Obama’s skills, it was a smart, calculated political move to pretend to rise above the fray and grasp the moral mantle. I did not think it was a awesome as K did. That being said I will continue to listen to what he has to say, as I am perfectly capable of forming my own opinions. There will be times when I think he’s spot on, others not so much. Surely we can handle differing viewpoints within our own ranks.

One day, one day after the President called and personally thanked the sheriff of Pima County, the President chose to speak about civility. Am I missing something? The sheriff exhibited the most uncivil blame against people that I have ever heard. What could have possibly happened during that time between a thank you call to Sheriff Dupnik and a speech by our President? On which occasion did the President mean what he said? I am beginning to believe that there is a fear of the fairness doctrine coming to all conservative media and blogs.